are you rhythmically innovative ?

[Torque]

I don't see it as a dim outlook on the whole thing i think slapping labels on art like innovative has always been dishonest. If we go by the definitions you posted technicly everything we create is innovation therefor the word has become basicly meaningless when talking about it in this context. This is why i think it should be thrown out of the vocabulary in the case of art because in the end it's just cheapened into nothing better than a marketing term. Call me a nut if you want but i believe in a creator and i believe music is his way of communicating though us to other people and if there are any props to give out for innovation they all belong to the creator not to us.

seriously, you're not getting the point of my post mate.
i perceive a staleness in our music in the rhythm section, i hear the same patterns over and over, i'm bored with them, i want to hear new structures, i spend most of my studio time experimenting with rhythm, it fascinates me, it's a passion. i always know when something fresh hits me in a club, because i find my body moving in ways it never has before.
for the last year i've been experimenting with 3 and 3/4 bar loops, i'm not even going to try to explain why because it would take too long , but one thing i know for sure is that you dance in a very different way to a 4 bar loop. i've been working with infinite polyrhythmic loops for years, (there is no 2/4/8 etc. there is only the now.) it centers your mind and hypnotizes you at the same time, i'm constantly experimenting with the interaction between mind/rhythm, body/rhythm, because i have the desire and the technological tools available to me.
thoughts of marketing never cross my mind for a nanosecond, nor do i care whether i write a killer tune or not, it's not even on the agenda, i just want to do my thing and communicate with like-minded musicians who feel the same way.

i asked a simple question 'are you rhythmically innovative ?'
a simple 'no' would have sufficed.

OK
Well then what you want to create is not techno or minimal because both of them have a formula when it comes to rhythm. Dance music is usually in a 4/4 time so you would probably need to step out of that and if you did it wouldn't be minimal really. There's nothing wrong with that, but asking a bunch of people that make electronic dance music if they are innovative in rhythm is kind of retarted simply because the fact that this music is created with a formula because that formula is time tested and proven to work to make people dance. Do you ask rock and roll bands if they are rhythmicly innovative, or polka bands etc...?

So just in case you don't understand the long answer, here is the short one: Nobody is........

[omnipresence]

he's not suggesting that you need to write in different time signatures, quite the opposite actually. you can write in 4/4 and still have phrases that don't line up every 1,2,4,8,16 bars etc.

[entek]

imo in the so called 'dance' genres,it is very difficult to incorporate different time meters and signatures..i think there have been many(and will be)talented musicians in this music that could have or have used these 'changes'. i don't remember people of the techno scene giving support to such moves(or trance etc etc)
there's so much music out there,i m sure u know it,which is no 4/4 at all,but it's not dance music.
i think dance producers,can't go much further than 4/4-at least yet.

my 0.02 cents.

[steevio]

OK
Well then what you want to create is not techno or minimal because both of them have a formula when it comes to rhythm. Dance music is usually in a 4/4 time so you would probably need to step out of that and if you did it wouldn't be minimal really. There's nothing wrong with that, but asking a bunch of people that make electronic dance music if they are innovative in rhythm is kind of retarted simply because the fact that this music is created with a formula because that formula is time tested and proven to work to make people dance. Do you ask rock and roll bands if they are rhythmicly innovative, or polka bands etc...?

So just in case you don't understand the long answer, here is the short one: Nobody is........

why is it not techno ? why is it not minimal ?
i dont get it. for me and alot of people i know in music, there is no formula, and that is why we got into techno in the first place. there are guidelines maybe, and if you stray too far from those guidelines then you're making another kind of music. but this formula you're talking about, it obviously exists for you but not for me. i use an entirely different formula for every single tune. about the only thing that i adhere to that is formulaic is a 4/4 kick pattern (but not always) and yes that is very tried and tested, and yes it works. but people dance to all kinds of music that isnt 4/4, and just because there is a 4/4 feel to a tune, doesnt mean it is formulaic, its just a pulse thats all, that ties everything together.
and i'm not going to accept that minimal has to adhere to a formula, thats so depressing. minimal just means minimal.
rock and roll is so formulaic that it basically hasnt progressed for decades, for me rock and roll doesnt exist anymore.

[northernlight]

let me ask you why ?
why as a DJ but not as a producer ?

one reason is that i only use two machines (machinedrum, monomachine) for my techno. so it's not possible to have many different time signatures at the same time.

but this is kind of a weak excuse. i could still use a different signature for each of the machine. thinking of this now, i'm going to give it a try next time in the studio.

i could add more equipment with step sequencers in different patterns lenghts. but at the moment it's important to me to restrict to two machines. maybe i can come up with some LFO settings that can simulate polyrhythms. so i could have elements run on a 4/4 sequencer but thanks to modulation they occur like a different signature. oh, i wish i could be in my studio and not at work today

[Bogdan]

innovation means new ideas, ideas are not mistakes.

we all have new/fresh ideas.. i think thats not the problem. the result is more important. if those fresh ideas end up in a innovative result.
and about the "mistake" part.. we meant that some ideas end up in a result that was not planned before.. and thats the accident.. and many times this is how innovative things come to light.

[steevio]

imo in the so called 'dance' genres,it is very difficult to incorporate different time meters and signatures..i think there have been many(and will be)talented musicians in this music that could have or have used these 'changes'. i don't remember people of the techno scene giving support to such moves(or trance etc etc)
there's so much music out there,i m sure u know it,which is no 4/4 at all,but it's not dance music.
i think dance producers,can't go much further than 4/4-at least yet.

my 0.02 cents.

i remember reading an interview with Lisa Lashes a few years ago ( dont ask me why i was bothering to read it) she's a cheesey hardhouse/trance DJ, and she said 'to be a DJ all you need to be able to do is count to 16 !!'
and that sort of attitude has permeated dance music for years, and it comes about because of vinyl DJ'ing. DJ's used to like to go to a gig with a bag of records, and play whatever felt right at the time, they didnt work anything out and to facilitate that, producers always laid out their tunes in that 16 /32 bar way, so there was no nasty supprises. it basically made DJing less stressful and left room for the DJ to do his thing with the EQs, faders etc. (i'm sure you know all this) but now we are not limited by vinyl, so why do we keep that mentality ?

[Bogdan]

you are right. we are not limited by vinyl. but i think we are limited by the people on the dance floor.